Post navigation

Don’t recall who said that, but it probably applies here given that I do hereby and forthwith dedicate this post to Teh Troll who frequented my last Friday’s (March 28 2014, Zoo blog-post titled “Outrage”), the Troll who commented thereupon via moniker “dntx16” and who wrote, in “its” final comment:

“I’m sorry that pointing out the anti Christian sentiment here was so painful for you. But your pride at occasionally qualifying your remarks with ‘…but only fundies and Christianistas’ doesn’t take remove the hatefulness of FSM [presumably “Flying Spaghetti Monster” mentioned ONLY by ‘dntx16’] remarks and questioning the sanity of believers . . .”

The keywords there seem to be the writer’s penchant for equating “anti Christian sentiment” with “hatefulness” and “questioning the sanity of believers” — words from the same writer who, in “its” own ‘summation’ (sort of) on that same post, suggested that . . . :

“. . . you all justify your daily dose of hate by making your targets into ‘the other’ and not like yourselves. . . . we know your posts questioning why ‘the others’ are so hateful are rhetorical. You know exactly why. They are the extreme right and the mirror image of you.”

Well, OK. So let’s backup a couple of centuries and review ideas expressed at the time by noted American Patriot Thomas Paine who eventually became notorious because of his pamphlet The Age of Reason (1793–94), in which he advocated deism, promoted reason and freethinking, and argued against institutionalized religion in general and Christian doctrine in particular: (underline highlight added). It should be fair to note, too, that Paine also wrote the pamphlet Agrarian Justice (1795), discussing the origins of property, and introduced the concept of a guaranteed minimum income. Stated another way, today’s “leftist” and “socialist” (read: NOT Republican) political movements are not new; they clearly have roots in the days of this nation’s emergence, of its founding.

OK. So. The current political conflict in this country seems to have evolved to once again reflect that ‘eternal’ tug-of-war between (a) the far right wing (including dntx16’s so-called “fundies and Christianistas“) and (b) the left wing, including each and all of those America-hating “Leftist Satanic ‘Marksist-Facist’ [sic] Socialist-Nazi-Communist” movements that seek only to . . . umm . . . what, first hate then enslave/destroy that “Constitutional” and Christian America? Something like that.

In other words, the current premise seems to propose that those who ARE NOT willing to assist in any way the nation’s poor and underprivileged (i.e. the elderly, the unemployed, the hungry, the sick, those “huddled masses yearning to breathe free,” including even military veterans), but who are willing to reduce tax rates on billionaires; to pay subsidies to big oil corps and to big Ag (among numerous others); to guarantee big banks and financial institutions THE RIGHT to pull off any financial rip-off that suits them, and to allow the imposition of THEIR ‘beliefs’ onto everyone else simply because THEIR beliefs are presumed to trump the beliefs of non-believers everywhere . . . Nah. No “hatefulness” embedded in any of theses courtesy the political rignt. Right? Right.

So. How to describe those Americans who, as devotees of either or both the political and religious right, can see no further than the edge of their nose? And can such description be accomplished without hatefulness or (‘heaven’ forbid) gunfire? Can words alone suffice? Let’s ask that famous British philosopher, logician, mathematician, historian, and social critic — a fellow named Bertrand Russell (1872 – 1970) — HIS impressions of . . . well, of wild-eyed Christianity. Russell’s impressions were, over the years dutifully recorded, a (presumably appropriate) handful of which read as follows:

“We may define ‘faith’ as a firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. . . . We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence.”

“I am sometimes shocked by the blasphemies of those who think themselves pious.”

“Neither a man nor a crowd nor a nation can be trusted to act humanely or to think sanely under the influence of a great fear.”

“Most people would die sooner than think; in fact, they do.”

“Collective fear stimulates herd instinct, and tends to produce ferocity toward those who are not regarded as members of the herd.”

“. . . all refutation must begin with some piece of knowledge which the disputants share; from blank doubt, no argument can begin.”

“[If] sin consists in acts of will that are in conscious opposition to . . . the moral law being known by Revelation as God’s will, it follows that a man destitute of religion cannot sin.”

“The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent full of doubt.”

“If throughout your life you abstain from murder, theft, fornication, perjury, blasphemy, and disrespect towards your parents, your Church, and your king, you are conventionally held to deserve moral admiration even if you have never done a single kind or generous or useful action. This very inadequate notion of virtue . . . has done untold harm.”

“In so far as religion makes its appeal to fear, it is lowering to human dignity.”

“Those who first advocated religious toleration were thought wicked, and so were the early opponents of slavery. The Gospels tell how Christ opposed the stricter forms of the Sabbath tabu. It cannot, in view of such instances, be denied that some actions which we all think highly laudable consist in criticizing or infringing the moral code of one’s own community. Of course this only applies to past ages or to foreigners; nothing of the sort could occur among ourselves, since our moral code is perfect.”

“If you think that your belief is based upon reason, you will support it by argument, rather than by persecution, and will abandon it if the argument goes against you. But if your belief is based on faith, you will realize that argument is useless, and will therefore resort to force either in the form of persecution or by stunting and distorting the minds of the young in what is called ‘education.’ This last is peculiarly dastardly since it takes advantage of the defenselessness of immature minds. Unfortunately it is practiced in a greater or less degree in the schools of every civilized country.”

“What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite.”

And finally, my favorite bit of “B.Russell’s Spouts”:

“The date of the creation of the world (according to the orthodox view) can be inferred from the genealogies in Genesis, which tell how old each patriarch was when his oldest son was born. Some margin of controversy was permissible, owing to certain ambiguities and to differences between the Septuagint and the Hebrew text; but in the end Protestant Christendom generally accepted the date 4004 B.C., fixed by Archbishop Usher. Dr. Lightfoot, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cambridge, who accepted this date for the Creation, thought that a careful study of Genesis made even greater precision possible; the creation of man, according to him, took place at 9.00 A.M. on October 23rd. This, however, has never been an article of faith; you might believe, without risk of heresy, that Adam and Eve came into existence on October 16th or October 30th, provided your reasons were derived from Genesis. The day of the week was, of course, known to have been Friday, since God rested on the Saturday.”

Is Russell driven by “hatefulness” ? By “anti Christian sentiment” ? Was he “questioning the sanity of believers”?? I think not. I think he was only discussing that which he saw, perceived. One can only dare ask, these days, why those of us who simply describe that which WE see or perceive to be wrong, or problematic, are suddenly defined as vindictive and hate-obsessed bastards, as those who “justify your daily dose of hate by making your targets into ‘the other’ and not like yourselves.”

Nope. Hard as it may be for some to believe, there are those of us who forever maintain that beliefs of others are forever their own, and we inviolably respect that premise. What puzzles me is why they so constantly refuse to allow myself and others the same option? Why do they presume that EVERYONE must believe as they do?

Answers:

Thomas Paine in “The Age of Reason” . . .

It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.”

Bertrand Russell in “Unpopular Essays” . . .

“Dogma demands authority, rather than intelligent thought, as the source of opinion; it requires persecution of heretics and hostility to unbelievers; it asks of its disciples that they should inhibit natural kindliness in favor of systematic hatred.”

Bertrand Russell in “Freedom” (Harcourt Brace, 1940)

“The first step in a fascist movement is the combination under an energetic leader of a number of men who possess more than the average share of leisure, brutality, and stupidity. The next step is to fascinate fools and muzzle the intelligent, by emotional excitement on the one hand and terrorism on the other.”

Belief is not confined to religion. I fear that because we respect a person’s right to believe, or not, in a God or gods, some have extended that freedom to their right to believe in whatever they wish even if it can be proven wrong by science. I would not change the right of any man to follow, or not, a religion of their own choosing, but am seriously disturbed at the effort to have science, with it’s rules for seeking and testing evidence, corrupted by beliefs which require no evidence. I find that mindset in the secular world as well. I read a lot about autism. Autism Awareness Day was yesterday and many autism related groups saw it as an occasion to demand that their belief that vaccination causes autism be accepted, that any funds that went to research into other possible causes was just a waste of money. As with climate change denialism, the vast majority of real scientific research is contrary to their “belief”, yet pointing that out makes one part of a vast conspiracy to deny their truth. Science is not a belief system, while evidence can emerge to discredit a currently accepted theory, truth is still truth whether we believe it or not. I guess I’m preaching to the choir here, but this has been pissing me off. I feel better for having raved a bit.

You are, imvho, spot on. It’s not the BELIEF, it’s the eternal attempt to IMPOSE an unsubstantiated BELIEF upon everyone else — the current thesis that drives the entire right wing in this country. They allow NO contrary opinion, esp. not even ideas based on DATA, on scientifically-proven FACT, to contradict their own ignorance-based attitudes.

As I’ve said time and again, any person can believe whatever they care to believe, but should they be allowed to impose their “beliefs” on anyone else? “Beliefs” which have zero factual basis? NO WAY!!!

“Religious institutions that use government power in support of themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths, or of no faith, undermine all our civil rights.” ~Thomas Jefferson

It’s also not caused by gluten, another currently popular belief. My son has schoolmates who are on restricted diets due to this fad. I found out because he took the time to research it online after someone questioned why he was allowed to eat what he pleased. His conclusion: “Autism just is part of me”. Have I mentioned how proud I am of this young man?

Donald Trump would probably demand to know if both were vaccinated similarly, and if they were, bingo proof that vaccinations cause autism.

Frankly, I find it very hard to understand this once-scientifically-advanced country’s current dash back to the pre-enlightenment attitudes that defined the Dark Ages. Why is it that ignorance-based “belief” is so much more a comfort to so many than is knowledge-based action?

I can’t understand it either. My best guess is that our world must seem increasingly complex, and that certainty and simplicity are comforting. I do know that it’s starting to drive me crazy. Due to the nature of my job, I am guaranteed to encounter at least one well meaning person this summer who will smugly inform me that if I only followed their belief, my child would be cured. I hope I do not hit them with a 4 lb. pork roast.

Courtesy of NPR’s Diane Rehm show, here’s an interesting audio link to her recent discussion with that well-known Socialist-Communist-‘Marksist-Facist’-Nazi-Democrat-Former-President Jimmy Carter, a man who may well be, this day, one of the most genuine “Christians” out there anywhere. Interesting that he continues his decades-long effort to help any and all people, and in the process has dismissed once and for good, his former Baptist Church affiliation because of their fall from grace in the practice of true Christian philosophy.

When I was a little guy, back in the mid-fifties, my dad — a self-confessed non-theist — commented once, within my earshot, on the backhanded antics of some of our little town’s most visible and vocal Christians. He said, “I don’t believe in any of that stuff, but apparently I’m a better ‘Christian’ than they are.” He was right, of course.

Check the fourteen points – they bag them all except the religion one, but one could argue that the Pussy Riot prosecution touched on that too.

The new premier of Crimea was the one who stuffed the parliament building with his own armed thugs (from his toilet and services monopoly business). This guy only got 4% of the vote last time around and essentially got Putin to rubber stamp his takeover.

Interesting how Russian and Amurkkkan political philosophies, once deemed arch-opposites, have each become centered on acquisition of money and power, and are rapidly becoming almost identical, with that one common goal. Makes we wonder if “Fascism” tendencies might not be deeply embedded in genetics.

The Pasture Bull Syndrome, maybe?

And actually, insofar as Russia’s lack of religion is concerned, one has to ask what is religion anyway, other than one of the more familiar routes to money and power? Apply that brief assumption and it pretty much explains why a bunch of men wrote the bible and subsequently proclaimed it the word of god.

Reminds me of that “immortal” line by Marlon Brando in the 1961 movie, One-Eyed Jacks. Brando (Kid Rio) was in jail and due to be hung, all thanks to his old bandit friend Dad Longworth, now a two-faced sheriff in Monterey CA. Brando defined much of the modern world when he said, to Longworth (Karl Mauldin)”

“You’re a one-eyed Jack around here, Dad, but I’ve seen the other side o’ your face.”

Amurkkka has truly and genuinely become one of them, a One-Eyed Jack. And what she should fear most of all is when others, no matter from where, finally figure it out, having finally seen “the other side.” .

Woo-hoo! Kodos the cat has already been adopted! I knew that anyone who met him would love him but I figured it would take until the weekend. I kind of suspect that the woman who processed him either took him herself or recommended him to someone. When she took him out of the carrier to confirm he has claws and balls he rolled right on his back so she could scratch his belly and she said that she had never taken in a cat that was so accepting.

It was a wrench to let him go. The only reasons I chose to keep Kang are that he’s quite a bit more playful, fetches his toys, and doesn’t require constant trimming around his nether regions to avoid smelling like pee.

Kodos is more of a lap cat and will even tolerate some tail pulling and the aforementioned belly scratching. I figured that he would do better with a wider variety of humans and will probably even tolerate kids and/or dogs while Kang will strike out if one passes the limits of his patience. Plus, now that his brother isn’t around, Kang has become much more affectionate to me and calmer so I think I made the right choice.

That ‘separation of brothers’ benefit is not a fantasy. From what I’ve been told, at least, separation can serve to benefit each and all. No more ‘familial’ competitive striving to PROVE alphahood. Etc. Separation need not diminish, and can in fact serve to build up each in ways only critters can really comprehend, but which nonetheless apply.

I have found that male cats simply don’t work all that well together in close quarters. The main reason I took on both of them together is that they had already been through the trauma of being left to die in the snow and they were inseparable at the start. After I had them for awhile they started going their own way and figure that separating them is the best solution anyway.

Speaking of things that didn’t take long; Steve Stockman has called for more guns on military bases. Again. Ans still not a peep about making it harder for people being treated for mental illnesses, including soldiers being treated for service related mental illnesses, to buy lethal weapons. He also doesn’t seem to realize that military bases are protected by armed guards. As an added irony; the latest Fort Hood shooter purchased his gun from the same shop that sold the last Fort Hood shooter his gun.

“He’s a sociopath,” Beck said of Obama. “He’s sociopathic. He doesn’t care anymore. I’m telling you, you put this guy in a uniform — that he himself designed, because he would be the greatest uniform designer ever, because nobody else could design a uniform like he could — you put this guy in a self-designed uniform, and he goes on for four hours talking.”

I stumbled upon a conspiracy theory that actually has a few facts in it’s favor; as all the best conspiracy theories do. It goes something like this.

Drones use the same technology as RC planes. The old “obsolete” radios use a fairly long wave length and fixed frequencies. The new radios use ultra short wavelengths and cycle through frequencies. This is great because a dozen or more people can fly at the same time and never have to worry about interference. But?

The new radios do not have the same range as the old ones. Long wavelengths give longer maximum range and short wavelengths give shorter range. So, logically, military drones that need to operate at long ranges need to use the older technology. Now?

There is pressure coming from the “evil government” to actually outlaw the use of the old radios. Even though the military drones are operating on frequencies that are separate from those assigned to model aircraft it has become a fairly simple task to modulate the frequency so it is theoretically possible to modify an old radio to interfere with said drones.

The concept of modifying “an old radio to interfere with said drones” sounds like a decent idea. Anything that interferes with drones can’t be all bad, right?

BTW, what, exactly, are “they” doing with old TV waves? The ones that used to deliver channels 2-13, give or take? Why is it that, if for whatever reason I might want to watch TV again, why do I have to pay a cable outfit for the privilege?

I don’t really like this world much anymore. Can’t figure out why, exactly, but something about it just seems kinda goofy.😯

I gasped when I realized my new model airplanes are Satan’s work but then I realized, duh, flying machines are black magic anyway.

On a slightly more serious note… I wonder if Marion “Pat” Robertson ever wires money to the foremen of his African diamond mines. Does he use banks that transfer his money BY COMPUTER? Does he distribute his insane drivel ON WEB SITES?

I really wish i could deduce whether these freaks are more evil than stupid or more crazy than evil or just as crazy as they are stupid as they are evil but, alas, it’s impossible to tell. The whole damned bunch of them are so far off the ends of all three scales that it becomes a fruitless endeavor.

“I do not want to discuss evolution … only touch on it from my own perspective: from the moment when I stood on the Serengeti plains holding the fossilized bones of ancient creatures in my hands to the moment when, staring into the eyes of a chimpanzee, I saw a thinking, reasoning personality looking back. You may not believe in evolution, and that is all right. How we humans came to be the way we are is far less important than how we should act now to get out of the mess we have made for ourselves. How should the mind that can contemplate God relate to our fellow beings, the other life-forms of the world? What is our human responsibility? And what, ultimately, is our human destiny?” ~Jane Goodall in Reason for Hope

Btw, whenever I trip my negative circuit breaker I go here, and I rejoice in the reality that we all will go away someway, someday, but passionately stand up and fight the good fight for social and economic equality…

Wow. There’s probably no point in even trying, but I assume you expect a response.

1. [presumably “Flying Spaghetti Monster” mentioned ONLY by ‘dntx16’]
Yes I was the only one who mentioned FSM in that post. Presumably you aren’t pretending that it’s not often used here. And it is known that a Christian, for whom you all express some affection, sees it regularly. And it is a reference to the God that she worships, not just the God that “fundies and Christianistas.” (not “my” “fundies and Christianistas”; those are zoo terms) You, in particular, also regularly make comments questioning the sanity of those who believe in God, therefore you must question the sanity of OIMF and, of course, Jimmy Carter. It doesn’t matter to me, but seems a little rude if you do care about OIMF, as you profess.
You don’t provide any proof that Republicans in general hate the poor. You just assume that they do because they don’t agree on policy matters and you hate them for it. And somehow your hate filled site is justified, but the other side’s hate filled sites are not. Some people oppose you on policy matters because they think it’s bad policy, not because they hate the poor.
As far as Paine and Russell, I never suggested that socialism is new and if anyone is trying to force others to profess a belief in God, I will gladly join in publicly opposing them.

Then this: “Is Russell driven by “hatefulness” ? By “anti Christian sentiment” ? Was he “questioning the sanity of believers” ?? I think not. I think he was only discussing that which he saw, perceived.”

In the referenced passage, Russell wrote about a belief with which he disagreed. He didn’t specifically question the sanity of believers. You, however, regularly make specific comments questioning the sanity of believers. And that’s fine. You have every right to state that belief as often as you like. I just wonder how you do that repeatedly, knowing that OIMF will read it again and again.

But the main point still stands. You ask how conservatives can be so hateful. It’s a common enough theme here. You demonize those who believe that liberal policies are bad for the country. You won’t even allow the idea that they just disagree with you. They have to be greedy and hateful, so that you are justified in hating them.

i was going to say something about why both your religion and simple human decency say that one shouldn’t judge others but I have decided to go with “piss off”.

OIMF is a believer and most of the rest of us critters are not believers and the only person who seems to have a deep, dark, desire to split us up is you. We are all able to understand each other just fine with, or without, you. Did I say “piss off”?

“and the beat goes on”. Why do you care what anyone here expresses?
You’re a troll, and not a very good one. OIMF is more than capable to express her beliefs, and continues to post here, and share her life experiences. Why do you belittle her? Why do you believe that you know her? Fuck off troll!

Split you up? Where did you get that?
I ask why posters continually question the sanity of believers, not fundies, but believers when you have a believer here about whom you profess good feelings. And not just once and done, but repeatedly. And I’m belittling her? Double plus good.
Just because you claim that I’m judging does not mean I’m judging. I asked a question about treatment of one of your own. ( and others that you claim to respect, like Jimmy Carter.
I also responded to a question about why “the others” are so hateful. No judgement there.

you are illogical and willfully stupid. You don’t respond directly to questions asked you. Answer Pete’s question, “can you point to the part of the scripture that gives you the right to judge others.”
And mine, “why do you belittle her?” Common monkey dance!

Outstanding in My Field is a fine woman who possesses a brain she’s not afraid to use. She doesn’t carry around the victim mentality you do, and she’s had true horrors in her life, nor does she check common sense at the door.

She’s one of the few Christians who actually walks the walk every moment of her life, instead of pissing and moaning about being mistreated because atheists exist, and she has been our friend for years.

You, on the other hand, are a sniveling little piece of shit hall monitor, who is so invested in your victimhood, that I doubt you’re even aware of it. And what a brave little soldier you are, waiting until late in the evening to respond to a taunting you so richly deserve.

“You don’t provide any proof that Republicans in general hate the poor.”

LOL. The beat goes sadly on alright. Your obsession with the word “hate” gets in your way of reality. Try this – Republicans don’t care about the poor. They oppose any program that helps the poor. Care about the rich? Oh yes the Republicans are all about caring about the rich. Tax breaks, making money of programs that help the poor, etc. You and your Christian Republican leaders don’t care about your fellow Americans. Get your religion out of politics as your founders intended.

That has to be one of the most pathetic trolls I have ever encountered. It’s sad, really…. sad….

However, it does have “self-righteous indignation” down pretty solid, as well as that whole “I’m in the room, everyone pay attention to ME!!” attitude, prevalent in spoiled children who aren’t getting their way.

If we collect some quarters and stale cheetoes does anyone think we might be able to get a better troll?